Kanoon Ke Hanth Bohot Lambe Hote Hai -all of us have grown up with this line, praising the Indian judiciary for its unbiased judgements. Lady Justice has been depicted wearing a blindfold which represents objectivity. But is it relevant today? There have been certain judgements that have left people wondering.

In a judgement dispensed by a Delhi Court, 2 persons were sentenced to a jail term of 4years for robbing a man of his watch and lunch box. The incident dates back to November 3, 2013.  The victim, Sonu, was employed at a shop in Chandni Chowk and was heading towards the bus stop at Kashmere Gate when he was accosted by three men. His bag contained a lunch box and a wrist watch, which he had received as a Diwali gift from his employer. According to the FIR logged with the police, the accused, Shankar and Vikas, had snatched Sonu’s bag, while the third person had pointed a knife at him. Shankar was arrested by the police official patrolling the area and Vikas was arrested a few days later. The third person who had threatened Sonu with his knife was able to flee.

In yet another incident a man was acquitted by Delhi High Court earlier this year after spending nearly 13 years in jail for stealing Rs 90. Allegations against Khalid Qureshi date back to 1999 he supposedly (along with his associate Jeetu Chaudhary) had robbed Puran Singh and Jagannath Das of Rs 50 and 40 respectively.  Khalid was sentenced to seven years in jail with a fine of Rs 10 (Rs 10???), though he was not arrested on the spot and evidence against him was not clear. The Delhi High Court let the man off after 13 years by saying “possibility of mistaken identity cannot be ruled out”.

Contrary to the above judgements, there are many cases which haven’t been dispensed off as speedily. The infamous Ruchika Girhotra Case is an example. The budding tennis player was molested by former Haryana DGP SPS Rathore on August 12 1990. Twenty years later, in May 2010 the accused  was sentenced to one and a half years in jail  by a Chandigarh court and was let off on bail by the apex court after serving six months in jail. The victim was unable to cope with the harassment inflicted on herself and her family, and committed suicide in December 1993.

Dating back to 2012, in an another example of a rape case, Rajasthan High Court lowered the sentence of the two accused on an appeal without stating valid reasons for doing so. The Supreme Court later denounced the judgement, stating that rapists should be awarded a minimum of 7 years of punishment which can be reduced only in special circumstances.

The Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on January 22, 2005 had awarded seven years of rigorous imprisonment to Vinod Kumar and Heera Lal for raping a Schedule Caste woman who had checked into a hotel along with her brother-in-law. The sentence was reduced from 7 years to 5 years for Vinod Kumar and to 11 months 25 days for Heera Lal by HC on an appeal by the convicts.

Post the December 16 gang rape, rape laws have become more stringent, but the real question is, does stealing a petty amount invite more rigorous punishment than sexual offences or do class and status influence the weight of punishment? Maybe it is time for the blindfold to be removed from Lady Justice’s eyes.